93 replies to this topic

[luciusgore]

Has anyone at CBn or anywhere else compiled a list of what we do KNOW about Casino Royale?
- Martin Campbell will direct
- Judi Dench is returning
- It is supposedly set during James Bond's first mission
- It is fairly faithful to the Fleming novel.
- It is set in the present day.
- Q may not be in it.
- etc.

[TheBritishEnd]

To be honest, I was hoping for something more official than the word of an annonymous "spokesperson".

I agree they should really just get on with it. I mean, at this point, it could even be the midget!

[Loomis]

Interesting other points in that article. Adrian Lester? Where did the reporter get it from? Just starting another rumour for the sake of it? I really like Adrian Lester, but apart from the fact that he's black - something that the article fails to mention, for some reason, but which will surely rule him out - he's hardly ruthless. I don't know - that whole business about Lester sounds planted to me. Where have there been rumours about him as Bond? We've heard just about every actor rumoured, but not him. So who planted that? Odd.

Yeah, but still.... look at some of the other names bandied about: Rory McCann, Gavin Rossdale, Colin Salmon, Rikki Lee Travolta.... Dean Gaffney for crying out loud.... probably be odder for Lester not to be mentioned, actually.

Seems all you have to do to be mentioned as a possible Bond these days is be.... alive, famous in some field or another (the Rossdale rumour shows you don't even have to be an actor, or at least known mainly as an actor) and able to speak English.

Or maybe Lester's one of those mysterious names zencat knows about (zen's mentioned a couple of times that he's aware of actors "in the mix" for the role of Bond who haven't been the subject of online rumour-mongering).

The take on Owen seems a bit dated, to put it mildly:

The casting process has become a public sport, cruel on openly shunned contestants but, it seems, a shrewd game on the producers' part. Anxious to avoid a repeat of the unpopular miscasting of George Lazenby in On Her Majesty's Secret Service in the Sixties, and later Timothy Dalton in the Eighties, the recent delays and leaks have allowed them to gauge public reaction. Clive Owen had some critical support at first and, had he been called on, was generally agreed to have been up to it. But then King Arthur came out and everyone decided Clive was a bit boring.

And since KING ARTHUR? CLOSER and SIN CITY came out and everyone decided Clive was overwhelmingly the best choice for Bond.

[Johnboy007]

I just think this article is beating the dead horse. Brosnan went public and wrote on his official website that he was not returning for Casino Royale, and thanks all of his fans. What's the purpose of the author announcing it, other than the fact that a phantom Eon source told him. It's just redundant.

Also, they aren't midgets "Dwarves, or little people".

/spoiler.gif

Just saw the CSI episode, couldn't resist

/gen_line.gif

[Seannery]

Interesting other points in that article. Adrian Lester? Where did the reporter get it from? Just starting another rumour for the sake of it? I really like Adrian Lester, but apart from the fact that he's black - something that the article fails to mention, for some reason, but which will surely rule him out - he's hardly ruthless. I don't know - that whole business about Lester sounds planted to me. Where have there been rumours about him as Bond? We've heard just about every actor rumoured, but not him. So who planted that? Odd.

Yeah, but still.... look at some of the other names bandied about: Rory McCann, Gavin Rossdale, Colin Salmon, Rikki Lee Travolta.... Dean Gaffney for crying out loud.... probably be odder for Lester not to be mentioned, actually.

Seems all you have to do to be mentioned as a possible Bond these days is be.... alive, famous in some field or another (the Rossdale rumour shows you don't even have to be an actor, or at least known mainly as an actor) and able to speak English.

Or maybe Lester's one of those mysterious names zencat knows about (zen's mentioned a couple of times that he's aware of actors "in the mix" for the role of Bond who haven't been the subject of online rumour-mongering).

The take on Owen seems a bit dated, to put it mildly:

The casting process has become a public sport, cruel on openly shunned contestants but, it seems, a shrewd game on the producers' part. Anxious to avoid a repeat of the unpopular miscasting of George Lazenby in On Her Majesty's Secret Service in the Sixties, and later Timothy Dalton in the Eighties, the recent delays and leaks have allowed them to gauge public reaction. Clive Owen had some critical support at first and, had he been called on, was generally agreed to have been up to it. But then King Arthur came out and everyone decided Clive was a bit boring.

And since KING ARTHUR? CLOSER and SIN CITY came out and everyone decided Clive was overwhelmingly the best choice for Bond.

I couldn't let you get by with that whopper Loomis. Owen also has a lot of detractors when it comes to Bond just ask Royalmile and others OR by the way, me.

[Loomis]

Interesting other points in that article. Adrian Lester? Where did the reporter get it from? Just starting another rumour for the sake of it? I really like Adrian Lester, but apart from the fact that he's black - something that the article fails to mention, for some reason, but which will surely rule him out - he's hardly ruthless. I don't know - that whole business about Lester sounds planted to me. Where have there been rumours about him as Bond? We've heard just about every actor rumoured, but not him. So who planted that? Odd.

Yeah, but still.... look at some of the other names bandied about: Rory McCann, Gavin Rossdale, Colin Salmon, Rikki Lee Travolta.... Dean Gaffney for crying out loud.... probably be odder for Lester not to be mentioned, actually.

Seems all you have to do to be mentioned as a possible Bond these days is be.... alive, famous in some field or another (the Rossdale rumour shows you don't even have to be an actor, or at least known mainly as an actor) and able to speak English.

Or maybe Lester's one of those mysterious names zencat knows about (zen's mentioned a couple of times that he's aware of actors "in the mix" for the role of Bond who haven't been the subject of online rumour-mongering).

The take on Owen seems a bit dated, to put it mildly:

The casting process has become a public sport, cruel on openly shunned contestants but, it seems, a shrewd game on the producers' part. Anxious to avoid a repeat of the unpopular miscasting of George Lazenby in On Her Majesty's Secret Service in the Sixties, and later Timothy Dalton in the Eighties, the recent delays and leaks have allowed them to gauge public reaction. Clive Owen had some critical support at first and, had he been called on, was generally agreed to have been up to it. But then King Arthur came out and everyone decided Clive was a bit boring.

And since KING ARTHUR? CLOSER and SIN CITY came out and everyone decided Clive was overwhelmingly the best choice for Bond.

I couldn't let you get by with that whopper Loomis. Owen also has a lot of detractors when it comes to Bond just ask Royalmile and others OR by the way, me.

LOL! I knew you wouldn't let that pass, Seannery.

Yes, it is indeed true that not everyone thinks Owen would be a good Bond, but you gotta admit (oh, go on) that the view of Owen in this article is more than a little out of date. Whether or not you reckon he'd make a decent 007, you'll surely agree that Owen's no longer "the boring guy from the flop KING ARTHUR" (any more than Brosnan is "the 'Remington Steele' guy" any more) - nowadays, he's the hottest Brit actor in Hollywood for at least a decade (you'd have to go back to.... Hugh Grant in the wake of FOUR WEDDINGS, probably), critically acclaimed and Oscar-nominated after CLOSER and SIN CITY, and getting plenty of very exciting and lucrative offers.

Which brings me back to the reason I think we won't be seeing him in CASINO ROYALE: he's (much) too big for Bond now.

Ironically enough, if the Bond filmmakers had made Owen an offer at the time of KING ARTHUR.... well, I reckon he might have taken it, nay, jumped at it. Now, though - bigger fish to fry.

[Pussfeller]

Owen has a handful of very vocal detractors, but he is obviously the most popular candidate.

Edited by Pussfeller, 17 April 2005 - 10:47 PM.

[Seannery]

Owen has a handful of very vocal detractors, but he is obviously the most popular candidate.

Well it's A LOT more than a handful BUT yes he has a good deal of support too. As Loomis says he is hot now in Hollywood and to fanatics though not to the man in the streets yet--which gives him the bandwagon fans who like to jump on the flavor of the month. BUT a good deal and not just a handful think Owen just plain isn't Bondian.

And Loomis we have definitely agreed that Owen being a hot and serious actor most likely doesn't want to be tied down to Bond. And also I further state Eon most likely doen't want someone like Owen who, because he has so many opportunities now, would be much harder to control than most candidates. Bond movies are all about the Producers--they don't want uppity actors or directors ala Spielberg or Tarentino.

[royalmile]

Well said, Seannery.

Extremely good points.

[Triton]

It seems to me that if Eon/UA/MGM/Sony are going to make the James Bond #6 casting process a public sport than I feel that it will take forever. Oh, I guess it already has.

Are all seventy-two names on their list going to be thrown out into the public arena to gauge public opinion? I believe its really a sad state of affairs that the next generation of Bond producers needs to make the casting decision based on public opinion. Between now and January will we see call-in television specials in America and the United Kingdom, a la American Idol, in which you see all the screen tests of the From Russia with Love bedroom scene, titled "You Cast the Next James Bond"?

I presume that Cubby Broccoli would have never made the James Bond casting process based on gauges of public opinion. He was a man of definite opinions and went with who he felt was the best James Bond, even if his preference was not the choice of his director, producer/stepson, crew, or studio.

Unfortunately, there isn't an obvious choice for James Bond #6 that will please all the fans or the general public. Although my personal preference, like Loomis', is for Clive Owen and I don't find him to be a "bit boring/"

If Eon/UA/MGM/Sony have such an aversion to risk of casting the wrong person for the James Bond role, perhaps its better if they just swallow their pride and give Pierce Brosnan his big fat pay check or whatever elese he wanted to do Casino Royale.

[Seannery]

I gather that the 72 names aren't on Eon's list BUT are a list they gathered from seeing who the media has bandied about as potential Bonds.

[Mr. Somerset]

Oh, well. Now it's going to be Daniel Craig (just kidding). We'll just have to wait and see who steps into the gunbarrel.

[Blofeld's Cat]

Eon probably feel there's no reason to announce who Bond #6 will be until the press conference just before shooting starts in January.

January? Why so pessimistic? Didn't this Eon employee hint heavily that there'd be news in a couple of months? By which time it'll be June, and since Brosnan was announced in June 1994 for a film due in November 1995, I think it's entirely possible that the new Bond will be revealed in, well, a couple of months.

Is a June announcement certain? Of course not, but if there's no June announcement then I reckon it'll be in July, or August, or September, or even October.... but January? Nah, we won't have to wait that long.

Not pessimistic at all. I'm just highlighting that there's plenty of time to announce Bond #6, and as posted since our two posts, things can still change at the last minute.

And if they are planning to make an announcement in June, things can still change in the next 2 months or so.

[Genrewriter]

So things are just as "opague" as ever then.

[Qwerty]

Just announce Owen or Jackman already.

[[dark]]

I'm disappointed by this, but it was a long time coming. I've had a year to come to terms with Brosnan's departure. It just doesn't feel right for Pierce to have made just four films. I was hoping for six. That's the minimum all successful Bonds do! That said, Die Another Day was a fine film for Brosnan to go out on. I'd rather he didn't go out at all, though. At least not for the moment.

Change may be a good thing for the franchise, but with what I'm reading so far, I'm doubting it. It all depends on who they eventually decide on, of course.

Did a reporter merely pick up the phone and ask as opposed to the others who just went with the flavor of the week?

Ask yourself this: What sells more papers? "Eon refuses to comment on Bond #6 hunt" or "Daniel Craig is the new 007!"?

[spynovelfan]

I gather that the 72 names aren't on Eon's list BUT are a list they gathered from seeing who the media has bandied about as potential Bonds.

Does anyone else find it a bit sad that EON have done that, though? So what if there are 72 actors who tabloids have bandied about? Why employ someone to snip those cuttings and place the names on a board? Just leave whoever it is who is responsible for casting to watch films and gauge the press coverage of serious candidates themselves. Placing Dean Gaffney's name on a wall seems like a waste of time to me, and I find it disheartening that EON are bothering to follow every single unsubstantiated rumour, let alone keeping track in such a way. You get the impression of a bunch of people delighted that their hunt for a new actor is being written about. Of course, the EON spokesperson might be the cleaning lady for all I know, but still - I don't think the company comes out of that article very well. Sounds amateurish, to say the least.

[lorna99]

I said that before that the names on the list was made up by the media, I do not think anybody on the list will get the James Bond role, as some of them are to busy with films or tv shows to do James Bond and the person who is picked for the role is not the list to play the role

Edited by lorna99, 18 April 2005 - 08:45 AM.

[Alex Zamudio]

i'm glad that i now have closure on his time as Bond.

YES! I agree! as much as I wanted Pierce to return for Casino Royale, it's been quite some time I made peace with the fact that he won't, but now with this further confirmation, we can move on, let Pierce leave his successful era in peace, and really speculate on the real thing, Bond #6 !!!

Regards.

Edited by Alex Zamudio, 18 April 2005 - 09:07 AM.

[Blofeld's Cat]

So things are just as "opague" as ever then.

Or perhaps just a slightly clearer shade of opaque.

[Skudor]

Great that Eon are finally able to give a bit more information. Other than that this is nothing we didn't more or less know already. It doesn't change the fact that everyone could change their mind later in the year, if no replacement is found. I don't expect it to happen though.

[David Schofield]

Don't worry everybody. Its going to be Owen.

And if Owen pushes EON too far and they're not happy with second best, it'll be Brosnan again.

However, I have littel doubt it will be Owen, in the near future.

[Loomis]

I gather that the 72 names aren't on Eon's list BUT are a list they gathered from seeing who the media has bandied about as potential Bonds.

Does anyone else find it a bit sad that EON have done that, though? So what if there are 72 actors who tabloids have bandied about? Why employ someone to snip those cuttings and place the names on a board? Just leave whoever it is who is responsible for casting to watch films and gauge the press coverage of serious candidates themselves. Placing Dean Gaffney's name on a wall seems like a waste of time to me, and I find it disheartening that EON are bothering to follow every single unsubstantiated rumour, let alone keeping track in such a way. You get the impression of a bunch of people delighted that their hunt for a new actor is being written about. Of course, the EON spokesperson might be the cleaning lady for all I know, but still - I don't think the company comes out of that article very well. Sounds amateurish, to say the least.

I seem to remember reading something here on CBn once to the effect that Eon screentests actors for Bond on a regular basis, even when there's someone firmly ensconced in the role. The reasoning behind this, of course, is that they may one day (God forbid) need a new 007 at extremely short notice, for instance in the event of "the Bond of record" getting killed or injured just before shooting a new film. I've no idea whether this is true or just another fan myth, but if it is true then it begs the question: why the (apparent) difficulty in choosing a replacement for Brosnan, if they always have a couple of actors "waiting in the wings"?

Anyway, I also recall another post here (sorry, no idea who wrote it or in which thread it appears) claiming that Eon tests actors who are patently inappropriate for Bond, just so that everyone can have a good laugh at the Christmas party watching the auditions on tape - which spynovelfan would doubtless agree is a sad and amateurish thing to do.

According to crashdrive (I think), Paul McGann is among the many actors to have tested for Bond at some point, so I'm guessing there may be at least a grain of truth in this "testing people just for a giggle" stuff.

[Loomis]

Don't worry everybody. Its going to be Owen.

And if Owen pushes EON too far and they're not happy with second best, it'll be Brosnan again.

However, I have littel doubt it will be Owen, in the near future.

Why so sure?

[David Schofield]

Don't worry everybody. Its going to be Owen.

And if Owen pushes EON too far and they're not happy with second best, it'll be Brosnan again.

However, I have littel doubt it will be Owen, in the near future.

Why so sure?

Because for all the curent popularity/not that well known(to some) and therefore availbale to EON/physical appearance/acting ability/cost/ appropriateness reasons that surrond Owen I cannot believe EON will let him slip. Owen brings far more than any of the talent curently available (with the possible exception of Jackman).

I also do not go for any of these suggestions that Owen thinks Bond would restrict him in other choices: Owen is wise enough to know the doors Bond will open for him and with at least 3 years between each film he will have time to work elsewhere. Nor do I believe that Owen thinks he has better options open to him.

I do not accept that an organisation as successful as EON could miss out on Owen when he is so far ahead of the other candidates and yet is available to them. I really do believe its just a question of time before the announcement. That said, I claim no inside knowledge, just an sensible analysis of the facts.

[Baril]

I do not accept that an organisation as successful as EON could miss out on Owen when he is so far ahead of the other candidates and yet is available to them. I really do believe its just a question of time before the announcement. That said, I claim no inside knowledge, just an sensible analysis of the facts.

I don't think it's only a matter of "facts" here. You know, if Barbara and MGW see Owen with the same eyes that I do, they won't even consider him for a minute. You can't predict their opinion, and in the end that's the only thing that matters. The same goes with any other contender. My point is, nobody can guess anything because we just don't know what's in Babs & MGW's head.

[[dark]]

My point is, nobody can guess anything because we just don't know what's in Babs & MGW's head.

In light of them firing Pierce, I bet I could tell you exactly what's in their head.

[spynovelfan]

According to crashdrive (I think), Paul McGann is among the many actors to have tested for Bond at some point, so I'm guessing there may be at least a grain of truth in this "testing people just for a giggle" stuff.

Well, he wouldn't be my choice, but I've heard much sillier names than his mentioned:



After all, this article claims that Peter Snow tested for OHMSS! But was deemed 'too tall' (couldn't they have checked that on his resume before they brought the chap in?).

[David Schofield]

According to crashdrive (I think), Paul McGann is among the many actors to have tested for Bond at some point, so I'm guessing there may be at least a grain of truth in this "testing people just for a giggle" stuff.

Well, he wouldn't be my choice, but I've heard much sillier names than his mentioned:



After all, this article claims that Peter Snow tested for OHMSS! But was deemed 'too tall' (couldn't they have checked that on his resume before they brought the chap in?).

Yes, it would seem EON do test an awful lot of people who are so obviously unsuitable for the part (according to rumour) that you really have to question how much of it is true. Surely EON know within fairly fixed parameteres what they are looking for and that some people really are a waste of time.

72 names on a list on a wall? Most CBNers couldn't find ten SERIOUS candidates, surely?

[David Schofield]

According to crashdrive (I think), Paul McGann is among the many actors to have tested for Bond at some point, so I'm guessing there may be at least a grain of truth in this "testing people just for a giggle" stuff.

Well, he wouldn't be my choice, but I've heard much sillier names than his mentioned:



After all, this article claims that Peter Snow tested for OHMSS! But was deemed 'too tall' (couldn't they have checked that on his resume before they brought the chap in?).

Yes, it would seem EON do test an awful lot of people who are so obviously unsuitable for the part (according to rumour) that you really have to question how much of it is true. Surely EON know within fairly fixed parameteres what they are looking for and that some people really are a waste of time.

72 names on a list on a wall? Most CBNers couldn't find ten SERIOUS candidates they'd want to see in the role, surely?